June 8, 2009

(PhysOrg.com) -- After nearly a decade of waiting, the U.S. Senate is expected Monday to pass a bill giving the Food and Drug Administration the authority to regulate tobacco, and despite controversies over the involvement of the tobacco industry in authoring the bill, it will be a great tool in advancing anti-smoking efforts in the country, a Georgia State University tobacco control expert said.

“The bill, while imperfect, is long overdue and much needed,” said Michael Eriksen, director of Georgia State’s Institute of Public Health and former head of the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention’s Office on Smoking and Health. “Tobacco is probably the only consumer product ingested by people that is not regulated by the FDA.”

The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act of 2009 has 56 sponsors, and despite objections from Senators in tobacco-producing states — who have threatened a filibuster — the bill will move on from the Senate to a conference committee to work out the differences between the Senate and House versions. The Obama Administration has indicated that the president will sign the legislation.

The bill is a result of more than a decade of litigation between the tobacco industry and government over the FDA’s powers to regulate a dangerous product. In the 1990s, the FDA tried to regulate tobacco but the companies sued, claiming that the FDA did not have the authority to do so. The Supreme Court ruled in 2000 that Congress would have to provide the authority to regulate tobacco.

Besides granting the FDA authority to regulate tobacco, warning labels on packages would be much larger; cigarettes could no longer be labeled as “light” or “low-tar”; and cigarettes could no longer have a “characterizing” flavor other than menthol. The new tobacco division of the FDA would be funded by fees from the tobacco companies.

The bill does present some challenges, Eriksen said. For example, the FDA currently lacks regulatory tobacco expertise, he said.

“They really don't have the expertise in-house now, which has been lost over the last 15 years due to litigation, and because it's taken Congress nine years to act,” he said. “The FDA will have to quickly ramp up efforts to gain this expertise.”

Related Stories

Recommended for you

A diet rich in magnesium may reduce the risk of diseases including coronary heart disease, stroke and type-2 diabetes according to a new meta-analysis published in the open access journal BMC Medicine. This analysis of the ...

A new study led by environmental health scientist Richard Pilsner at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, one of the first to investigate whether preconception exposures to phthalates in fathers has an effect on reproductive ...

New research from the Maine-Syracuse Longitudinal Study (MSLS) confirms that persons who eat chocolate at least once a week have a lower prevalence of diabetes and are at lower risk for a diagnosis of diabetes four to five ...

Greater weight increases the likelihood of night sweats and hot flashes during early stages of the menopause transition but reduces those symptoms throughout menopause and beyond, new UC Davis research published in the journal ...

Bisphenol-A (BPA), parabens and antimicrobials are widely used in personal care products and plastics. The U.S. and other governments have banned or restricted some of these compounds' use in certain products for babies and ...

They'll probably fail to make a distinction between cigarettes on one hand and cigars and pipe tobacco on the other. Prediction: ham-handed regs that make Grandpa's cherry-flavored pipe-tobacco illegal, and ridiculous warning labels on individual cigars.

Will be branded on the side of each cigar. The ink used to print it on the cigar will actually be more harmful to inhale than the cigar itself AND it has the added bonus of raising the price another $.50 per cigar.

Smokers- your foul worthless addiction will soon be regulated like other drugs, by prescription. It will be dispensed like methadone and cost as much. Tobacco is the only drug that has no effect at all other than to relieve it's own withdrawal symptoms- and make everybody sick.

@otto1923 - First of all, Tobacco isn't a drug. It's a plant. Secondly, I'm not complaining about regulation. If the product had been properly regulated way back when, we probably wouldn't have had the tobacco industry adding all sorts of nasty chemicals to make their product more harmful and addictive.

If you do not smoke, good for you. I do. I don't go around thumping my chest with a holier than thou attitude saying you should start smoking, please check the self perceived moral high ground you seem to have found, at the door.